On Saturday 22 October 2005 13:31, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Ping time is around 50msec, and that seems pretty much okay, but
> 10KB/sec seems like way too low.
>
> I am limited to 10KB/sec both on linux-to-linux bnetp transfers and it
> limits my transfer rates using edge and n6230, too :-(.
>
> Ping times during transfer:
>
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=149 ttl=64 time=62.8 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=150 ttl=64 time=64.2 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=151 ttl=64 time=85.9 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=152 ttl=64 time=80.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=153 ttl=64 time=132.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=154 ttl=64 time=64.8 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=155 ttl=64 time=128.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=156 ttl=64 time=116.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=157 ttl=64 time=120.5 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=158 ttl=64 time=240.2 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=159 ttl=64 time=111.2 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=160 ttl=64 time=382.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=161 ttl=64 time=912.6 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=162 ttl=64 time=1612.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=163 ttl=64 time=4373.6 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=164 ttl=64 time=5128.8 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=165 ttl=64 time=7191.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=166 ttl=64 time=9473.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=167 ttl=64 time=8469.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=168 ttl=64 time=10040.7 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=169 ttl=64 time=9036.7 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=170 ttl=64 time=10681.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=171 ttl=64 time=9677.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=172 ttl=64 time=8673.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=173 ttl=64 time=10685.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=174 ttl=64 time=9681.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=175 ttl=64 time=8677.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=176 ttl=64 time=11997.2 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=177 ttl=64 time=10993.4 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=178 ttl=64 time=9989.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=179 ttl=64 time=13797.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=180 ttl=64 time=12793.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=181 ttl=64 time=11789.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=182 ttl=64 time=10784.9 ms
> 64 bytes from 10.1.0.3: icmp_seq=183 ttl=64 time=9781.1 ms
>
> Netdev watchdog complains a lot:
>
> Oct 22 18:53:57 amd pand[2439]: Bluetooth PAN daemon version 2.19
> Oct 22 18:53:57 amd pand[2439]: Connecting to <won't tell you>
> Oct 22 18:53:58 amd pand[2439]: bnep0 connected
> Oct 22 18:54:37 amd kernel: usb 3-1: USB disconnect, address 2
> Oct 22 18:55:33 amd kernel: NETDEV WATCHDOG: bnep0: transmit timed out
> Oct 22 18:55:59 amd last message repeated 2 times
> Oct 22 18:56:51 amd last message repeated 5 times
> Oct 22 18:57:55 amd last message repeated 3 times
> Oct 22 18:59:03 amd last message repeated 7 times
>
> I use this to set up billionton:
>
> setserial /dev/ttyBT baud_base 921600
> hciattach -s 921600 /dev/ttyBT bcsp
>
> root@amd:~# tcpspray -n 1 -b 1000000 10.1.0.3
>
> Transmitted 1000000 bytes in 163.256781 seconds (5.982 kbytes/s)
>
> (okay, this was little slower, I was far from other side). Most tests
> look like this:
>
> root@amd:~# tcpspray -n 1 -b 1000000 10.1.0.3
>
> Transmitted 1000000 bytes in 103.183640 seconds (9.464 kbytes/s)
Pavel,
I see about the same with a bluetooth usb adapter. Suspect that is about what
you should see with bluetooth - its not designed for speed. It would be really
nice to be wrong though...
Ed Tomlinson
Hi!
> > > > Transmitted 1000000 bytes in 103.183640 seconds (9.464 kbytes/s)
> > >
> > > I see about the same with a bluetooth usb adapter. ?Suspect that is about what
> > > you should see with bluetooth - its not designed for speed. ?It would be really
> > > nice to be wrong though...
> >
> > No, it is designed to do more. It should do around ~100 kbytes/sec
> > according to spec, and MSI dongle *does* do 25 kbytes/sec easily
> > against nokia 6230.
>
> Pavel,
>
> Then the interesting test is to see if the delay is kernel or phone. Are you talking
> to the same phone with both adapters? If so please copy me on any test patches as
> I too have the same issue when talking to a pilot T3 using rfcomm using a "0a12:0001
> Cambridge Silicon Radio, Ltd Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode)" usb dongle.
>
> I would _love_ to get 25K/s
Yes, I was using same phone (n6230) with MSI and billiontonCF. It gets
25KB/sec with MSI, but only 10KB/sec with billiontonCF.
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!
On Sunday 23 October 2005 04:35, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Transmitted 1000000 bytes in 103.183640 seconds (9.464 kbytes/s)
> >=20
> > I see about the same with a bluetooth usb adapter. =A0Suspect that is a=
bout what
> > you should see with bluetooth - its not designed for speed. =A0It would=
be really=20
> > nice to be wrong though...
>=20
> No, it is designed to do more. It should do around ~100 kbytes/sec
> according to spec, and MSI dongle *does* do 25 kbytes/sec easily
> against nokia 6230.
Pavel,
Then the interesting test is to see if the delay is kernel or phone. Are =
you talking
to the same phone with both adapters? If so please copy me on any test pat=
ches as
I too have the same issue when talking to a pilot T3 using rfcomm using a "=
0a12:0001=20
Cambridge Silicon Radio, Ltd Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode)" usb dongle.
I would _love_ to get 25K/s
Thanks,
Ed Tomlinson
Hi!
> > I use this to set up billionton:
> >
> > setserial /dev/ttyBT baud_base 921600
> > hciattach -s 921600 /dev/ttyBT bcsp
> >
> > root@amd:~# tcpspray -n 1 -b 1000000 10.1.0.3
> >
> > Transmitted 1000000 bytes in 163.256781 seconds (5.982 kbytes/s)
> >
> > (okay, this was little slower, I was far from other side). Most tests
> > look like this:
> >
> > root@amd:~# tcpspray -n 1 -b 1000000 10.1.0.3
> >
> > Transmitted 1000000 bytes in 103.183640 seconds (9.464 kbytes/s)
>
> Pavel,
>
> I see about the same with a bluetooth usb adapter. Suspect that is about what
> you should see with bluetooth - its not designed for speed. It would be really
> nice to be wrong though...
No, it is designed to do more. It should do around ~100 kbytes/sec
according to spec, and MSI dongle *does* do 25 kbytes/sec easily
against nokia 6230.
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!